Pages

Thursday, April 29, 2010

Quotes, Notes, and Links: Milwaukee Bucks 91 Atlanta Hawks 87

For the first time in my memory, a Hawks game takes up two positions in the Daily Dime. Jeremy Schmidt of Bucksketball uses the second spot to describe how unusual it was for the Bucks to get to the line as frequently (or, if you prefer, constantly) as they did in the fourth quarter. Just below, I give an abridged description of the meltdown from the Hawks' perspective.

"I wish I knew. I can’t say it’s been that way since the All-Star game, but it’s been that way against the Cavaliers. We’ve had close games against them, and we can’t find any offense in the fourth quarter."

"We had our chances but we had a bad fourth quarter defensively. We gave up 31 points. We were solid on defense up until then. They got hot, made some shots. We matched shots but we couldn’t get stops when we needed top get them. We couldn’t control the dribble. Everybody just picked and choosed when they wanted to drive the ball."

"We can't predicate everything we do on making shots. I thought tonight we did that in the third and fourth quarter. We shut it down when we couldn't make shots. When you're missing jump shots, you've got to find a way to get to the free-throw line and we didn't do that tonight."

They rarely moved the ball from side-to-side, and were more interested in blocking shots than in playing solid defense.

And exactly how did the Hawks try to manifest their spectacular advantage in talent? By running an endless series of isolations — 42 to be exact, which accounted for nearly half of their 83 total shots. Josh Smith, Marvin Williams, Al Horford, Iso-Joe Johnson and Jamal Crawford all were allowed to dribble this way and that way until they could find what they believed to be an acceptable shot. All of these individualistic exhibitions produced 40 points.

Compare this situation with the Bucks, who ran 17 isos that generated only nine points.

Only Williams (8-10, 22 points) and Horford (11-21, 25 points) rose to the occasion. Otherwise, Mike Bibby was 1-5 and useless; JJ was 6-16 and was smothered by Salmons; Josh Smith was 3-8 with 3 blocks and was mostly AWOL, and Crawford had a John Starks-type performance, shooting a ludicrous 4-18.

Al Horford (25 points and 11 rebounds) and Marvin Williams (22 points on 8-of-10 FG) were productive, but the trio of Joe Johnson (13 points on 6-of-16 shooting and six assists), Josh Smith (seven points, nine rebounds, and three blocks), and especially Jamal Crawford (11 points on dismal 4-of-18 shooting) couldn't get it together. The offense struggled horribly late, full of stagnant one-on-one plays with little movement or chance for quality shots. Johnson fouled out on a pass-and-crash charge with 2:15 left, and the offense was noticeably directionless with him out, too.

So it’s come to this for the Hawks: Woody invoking his days in Detroit, when the Pistons won a Game 6 at New Jersey and then clinched the series at home in the East semifinals. “We’re a long ways away from Detroit, I know,” he said. “But that’s how guys have got to think.”

They can think it, and maybe that’s all they have to go on right now, but it doesn’t make it true. That Pistons team was led by tough-minded veterans. They’d already been to the East finals. They played defense with zeal in a system they were committed to. They shared the ball on offense and didn’t have a star who dominated the ball.

The Hawks are nothing like that. They are facing elimination by a six seed missing its two best players and run by a rookie point guard. And they got to this point with a collapse that I’d call incredible except I saw similar Hawks folds so many times down the stretch.

All over the league, critics are going to say that the Hawks, who may have the highest knucklehead-to-talent ratio in the NBA, have blown it. But that wouldn't be giving full credit where credit is applicable.

It was Ersan Ilysova making hustle plays while the bewildered, outsmarted, out-coached Hawks stood around and watched, much as the Bucks had in the first two games at Philips Arena. It was Kurt Thomas, in foul trouble for most of the game, taking a charge in the closing moments, the defining moment of a season that got Joe Johnson, one of the Hawks' most dangerous scorers, off the floor.

How does a man end a game with a +21 +/- while attempting just one shot and going scoreless? Well, it’s actually a two part answer. Part one is he plays terrific defense and part two is his backups play generally horrible. That’s the story of Kurt Thomas on Wednesday. Al Horford may have scored 25 points, but just nine of them came with Thomas on the court. Horford wasn’t able to back Thomas down and get any easy looks the way he did when any combination of Primoz Brezec, Dan Gadzuric, Ersan Ilyasova and Luc Richard Mbah a Moute were on him. His defense on an otherwise dominating Horford will deservedly take a backseat to the monster charge he drew on Joe Johnson, but it was a huge relief for everyone rooting for Milwaukee when he checked back in to slow Horford in the fourth quarter.

Folding up late in games is not some new thing for the Hawks, it's a season-long trend. Their execution goes away, their play calling is poor and/or ignored. At some point, that responsibility has to fall on coach Mike Woodson. He has not made an adjustment to counter Milwaukee's destroying the Hawks switch on the pick and roll. That play and the Hawks late game play combined into one big disaster late.

Early in the game the Hawks tried to exploit their advantage and size inside -- and it worked. Marvin Williams was attacking, dunking and hit four of five. Josh Smith and Al Horford were getting good looks. The only thing that kept the Bucks in it was Brandon Jennings, who kept going around the pick, getting a Hawk big to switch on him them blowing by for a layup, or hitting the jumper over him. Jennings started 5 of 7 while the rest of team was 4 of 14 in first quarter.

Late in the game, it was John Salmons doing the same thing off the same plays for the Bucks, and he had eight points of their 14-0 run.

Late in the game Hawks stopped going inside, they stopped making good passes into the post. They went to isolations, and the result was help on drives where the Hawks missed layups.

I know I've spent my entire HawkStr8Talk blog career trying to explain why this isn't an organization that has been committed to making championship moves, employing a championship strategy, and having championship heart. But it doesn't feel good to be right about anything.

Is the series over? No. The Hawks still can win two in row easily. The drastically disappointing thing about this whole series is that our team could win the next two games quite easily. But it certainly feels over.

And that is the sad thing. This team, this rebuilding process seems over (not done but certainly a chapter complete).

6 comments:

This is verbatim from the Atlanta Constition this morning." ... but if they had him (Bogut) in this series, it would be over already."I made this statement three days ago in this forum and was rudely dismissed (not by you, Brett) for offering nothing more than a "canard". Yeah.

I was the guy who said that, Mitch, and not because the sentence "if Bogut was healthy, the Bucks would pound the Hawks in a seven-game series" was wrong, it's just that the Hawks wouldn't have ever faced the Bucks with a healthy Bogut--if he'd never gotten injured, the Bucks would have ended up with the five seed and the Hawks would have gotten the Heat instead. It's an even less useful "what if" than usual, because the answer to "what if Bogut was healthy?" doesn't have anything to do with the Hawks. Besides--since when has quoting the AJC been definitive proof someone's point was correct?

The Hawks seem to suffer from a leadership vacuum, both from a 'taking over the game' standpoint and from a 'pulling Smoove & Horford aside and telling them not to respond to Kurt Thomas in any way, just to keep playing their game' standpoint. Not coincindentally, I think, they're a pretty soft team. Offering more than marginal resistance to what they're trying to do flusters them and knocks them off their game pretty easily for a team that's trying to join the elite.

Having said that, I don't have an easy solution. Believe me, I wish I did. It could be a simple as bringing in one player who has the mental toughness to set an example for the rest of the team, but I'm afraid that one person would get pulled down by the general apathy.

I just hope I will have forgotten about most of this by the start of next season.

For a start the Hawks lack a decent point guard. The approach of playing both Johnson and Crawford is flawed because they look for their own shot first and generally will at best find an open 3-point shooter.

I'm not sure if Bibby is the guy or if Teague will step up (if given a chance) but free agency this season would be a good chance to get someone to anchor the team.

New coach? Someone more proactive?

Who knows... They're fun when it's working but disappointing when when faced with adversity.